Listening to Nile leads to fistfight

[Valerie]

But you don't have the right to stand up for yourself and you don't have the right to defend yourself unless some asshole punches you first.

This is completely wrong. You're basically saying that if someone points a gun at someone, the person having the gun pointed at them can't defend themselves unless they get shot first. If you feel threatened, you have every right in the world to defend yourself.

 

[skeptik]

He definitely could of handled it better. But think of the situation in reverse, if you're harassing someone and they're telling you to fuck off, does that give you the right to keep following them and harassing them just because they didn't politely ask you to go away?

The problem with this post is that it implies that I somewhere suggested that the other person was in the right, and that it was perfectly acceptable to do what he did. The other guy is just as, if not as, big of an asshole in this situation. But he did not resort to physical violence, and when challenge_everything did, he did not. This is a key point here, because if he WAS looking for a fight, he got it, and he didn't take it. It seems more likely that this guy was simply enraged that somebody else could be such an asshole when they were originally the ones being rude to begin with by having their music intrusively loud (aka loud enough for others to hear clearly to the point where one would feel compelled to ask them to lower it). So I will in no way entertain this notion that was proposed that this guy was just looking for a fight because 1) he was not the original instigator and 2) when he was offered the fight, he declined and 3) when he was hit, he did not retaliate. That doesn't make it okay the harass somebody and stalk them for several blocks, which means that he is also in the wrong, but again, the physical violence is the foremost offense.

 

[skeptik]

This is completely wrong. You're basically saying that if someone points a gun at someone, the person having the gun pointed at them can't defend themselves unless they get shot first. If you feel threatened, you have every right in the world to defend yourself.

Did this guy put a fist in challenge_everything's face or do anything physically speaking that would indicate that he was willing to physically abuse him? I don't recall any such incident in his account. challenge_everything was not under a threat of violence, he was just pissed off.

 

[Valerie]

Did this guy put a fist in challenge_everything's face or do anything physically speaking that would indicate that he was willing to physically abuse him? I don't recall any such incident in his account. challenge_everything was not under a threat of violence, he was just pissed off.

I wasn't even talking about the original post, numbnuts.

 

[skeptik]

Well obviously if somebody sticks a gun in your face you have to do something about it, sugartits.

 

[Valerie]

Well obviously if somebody sticks a gun in your face you have to do something about it, sugartits.

Mr. Flames here apparently didn't know that.

 

[thisisaformicatable]

1) he was not the original instigator

I doubt it would go like that in a hypothetical trial, the following/harassing is the first thing that could be construed as assault.

 

[skeptik]

Instigation is not assault. challenge_everything was the first one to be a dick, aka he instigated.

 

[thisisaformicatable]

I'm talking legally.

 

[skeptik]

I'm not.

 

[Valerie]

I'm not.

You're illegal.

 

[challenge_everything]

Did this guy put a fist in challenge_everything's face or do anything physically speaking that would indicate that he was willing to physically abuse him? I don't recall any such incident in his account. challenge_everything was not under a threat of violence, he was just pissed off.

He said 'name a time and place' which clearly indicated a willingness to use violence, although perhaps not an imminent one. Add to this an aggressive manner and physically close proximity to me for a sustained period of time.

I aspire to some sort of higher Gandhian ideal like most rational and educated people, and I'm not proud of my actions. But it's easy to be self-righteous when you're sitting behind a computer desk and not in that situation yourself.

 

[thisisaformicatable]

Of course, it seems notable when considering whether the guy was looking for a fight that he responded to an rude denial to a polite request with assault.

 

[Life Sucks]

You were both being pretty out of line. One thing I will say is that you should not have hit him first (though I'm sure you know this because of the legal aspect of it). IMO you should only hit someone if they hit you first, but if someone hits you first, beat the fuck out of them, regardless of age, race, or gender.

 

[Manic Ferocity]

Sure challenge_everything was in the wrong to not simply turn his music down and was rude for telling him to "piss off" but the instigator took it to unnecessary measures to stalk him afterwards in which, in my opinion, is justification for what challenge_everything did.

 

[BlackMetalWhiteGuy]

Next time you run away from someone like this, don't just stop and give up once you realize they can keep up with you. Start sprinting (preferably downhill) as fast as the slower one of you can. When he's close enough behind you, stop abruptly, lower yourself and face the opposite direction. With any luck, he won't have enough time to react and he'll go flipping over you like the retard he is. Also, you get extra points if you can position yourself in a way that causes him to fly into a lamp post, trash can, etc. Before he's able to get back up, or before he's even hit the ground if you're really good, continue sprinting in the opposite direction.

If this doesn't work, run toward traffic and stop just short of being hit by a slow moving vehicle, so that he crashes into your back, pushing you into traffic. Now you can charge him with assault, reckless endangerment, and sexual harassment

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Nice!

 

[Satanstoenail]

Can you try this again without the bogus "masculine" argument that has no relevance in an intelligent discussion?

Oh for God's sake. Fine.

Say a guy is screaming at your girlfriend and calling her every name under the sun, you tell him to stop, you try to walk away etc., but he keeps following you and taunting you and screaming at her. It goes on for ages and your girlfriend is obviously afraid and looking to you for help. What do you do? Try to find a policeman?

I will say, this has happened to me. It was late at night, no cops around, and no mobile phones.

I aspire to some sort of higher Gandhian ideal like most rational and educated people, and I'm not proud of my actions. But it's easy to be self-righteous when you're sitting behind a computer desk and not in that situation yourself.

Indeed. It's all very well to sit and contemplate what you would do in any given situation, but in the heat of the moment there are many unknowns and anything can happen.

 

[waif]

This is completely wrong. You're basically saying that if someone points a gun at someone, the person having the gun pointed at them can't defend themselves unless they get shot first. If you feel threatened, you have every right in the world to defend yourself.

Interesting interpretation, but completely the opposite of what I was saying. If you'd read my previous post, you would have realized that my point was that you should be able to defend yourself. If someone sticks a gun in your face, you probably ought to try running, though.

 

[False Joe]

If someone sticks a gun in your face, you probably ought to try running, though.

If you can outrun a bullet, you should apply for the Olympics